Report to the Chairman, Committee on 

Finance, U.S. Senate 

United States General Accounting Office 

GAO 

June 2003 CAPITOL HILL 

ANTHRAX INCIDENT 

EPA's Cleanup Was 

Successful; 

Opportunities Exist to 

Enhance Contract 

Oversight 

GAO-03-686 
EPA spent about $27 million on the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup, using funds 

from its Superfund program. From the outset, many uncertainties were 

associated with the cleanup effort, including how to remove anthrax from 

buildings. EPA revised its November 2001 estimate of $5 million several 

times during the cleanup as the nature and extent of the contamination 

became fully known and the solutions to remove and properly dispose of the 

anthrax were agreed upon and carried out. To conduct the cleanup, EPA 

relied extensively on the existing competitively awarded Superfund 

contracts it routinely uses to address threats posed by the release of 

hazardous substances. Specifically, about 80 percent of the contract costs 

were incurred under 10 of EPA’s existing Superfund contracts. 

EPA dedicated significant resources to overseeing the many contractors 

working on the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup—including about 50 staff from 

nine regional offices experienced in leading and overseeing emergency 

environmental cleanups. Most often, these staff ensured that the contractors 

were on site and performing assigned tasks efficiently. EPA also assigned an 

administrative specialist to ensure that contract charges were accurate and 

reasonable. EPA’s assessment of its emergency responses to the anthrax 

incidents, which focused on or included the Capitol Hill site, concluded that, 

overall, the agency had used its contracts effectively but that it could 

improve some areas of its contracting support. In addition, GAO’s review of 

the Capitol Hill cleanup revealed inconsistencies in EPA’s cost oversight 

practices among regions. For example, EPA uses a computerized system for 

tracking contractor costs for hazardous substance removal contracts, but 

regions use the system inconsistently for the technical assessment contracts 

also used during emergency responses. Consistent use of the system would 

likely improve the quality of EPA’s nationwide contract data and enhance 

EPA’s oversight capabilities. 

EPA agreed to indemnify two contractors with key roles in the fumigation of 

the Hart Senate Office Building with chlorine dioxide gas against liability 

that could have resulted if a third party had been injured by the contractors’ 

release of a harmful substance, including anthrax. 

Cleanup Personnel Prepare Duct Work for Air Sampling 

In September and October 2001, 

the first cases of anthrax 

bioterrorism occurred in the United 

States when letters containing 

anthrax were mailed to 

congressional leaders and 

members of the news media. As the 

cleanup of the Capitol Hill anthrax 

site progressed, EPA’s estimates of 

the cleanup costs steadily rose. 

GAO was asked to describe (1) the 

costs EPA incurred to conduct the 

cleanup and how it was funded, (2) 

the extent to which EPA awarded 

the cleanup contracts 

competitively, (3) EPA’s oversight 

of the contractors’ work and any 

suggested changes to EPA’s 

contracting practices, and (4) the 

extent to which EPA agreed to 

indemnify contractors against 

liability for potential damages 

related to the cleanup. 

To enhance EPA’s contract 

oversight, GAO recommends that 

the EPA Administrator require all 

EPA regions to more consistently 

use two contract oversight 

practices and to examine 

expanding the use of another. 

EPA officials agreed to implement 

or consider implementing GAO’s 

recommendations. Their 

comments and our response are 

discussed at the end of this report. 

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-686.

To view the full report, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact John 

Stephenson (202) 512-3841 or 

stephensonj@gao.gov. 

Highlights of GAO-03-686, a report to the 

Chairman, Committee on Finance, U.S. 

Senate 

June 2003

CAPITOL HILL ANTHRAX INCIDENT

EPA's Cleanup Was Successful; 

Opportunities Exist to Enhance Contract 

Oversight 
Page i GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

Letter 1

Results in Brief 2

Background 4

EPA Spent About $27 Million of its Superfund Money to Clean Up 

the Capitol Hill Anthrax Site 10

EPA Competitively Awarded Most Major Contracts Used in the 

Anthrax Cleanup 13

EPA Devoted Extensive Resources to Overseeing Contractors’ 

Work, yet Some Contracting Changes Would Better Support EPA 

Cleanups 19

EPA Negotiated Indemnification Agreements with Two 

Contractors to Address Their Liability Concerns 29

Conclusions 31

Recommendations for Executive Action 31

Agency Comments and Our Response 32

Scope and Methodology 33

Appendix I Contract Tasks and Roles 36 

Appendix II GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments 41 

Tables 

Table 1: EPA Estimated Contract and Government Agreement Cost 

Increases for the Capitol Hill Anthrax Cleanup 11

Table 2: Competitively Awarded Superfund Contracts Used for the 

Capitol Hill Anthrax Cleanup 15

Table 3: Noncompetitively Awarded EPA Contracts Used for the 

Capitol Hill Anthrax Cleanup 17

Table 4: Agreements with Federal and State Agencies Used for the 

Capitol Hill Anthrax Cleanup 19

Figures 

Figure 1: A Sample Is Inserted into a Vial in the Hart Senate Office 

Building 6

Figure 2: Cleanup Personnel Use a HEPA Vacuum in a 

Congressional Office 7

Contents 
Page ii GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

Figure 3: Breakout of EPA Contract and Government Agreement 

Costs 13

Abbreviations 

CDM CDM Federal Programs Corporation 

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, 

 and Liability Act 

EPA Environmental Protection Agency 

HEPA high efficiency particulate arresting 

NCP National Oil and Hazardous Substance Pollution 

 Contingency Plan 

This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. It may contain copyrighted graphics, images or other materials. 

Permission from the copyright holder may be necessary should you wish to reproduce 

copyrighted materials separately from GAO’s product. 
Page 1 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

June 4, 2003 

The Honorable Charles E. Grassley 

Chairman, Committee on Finance 

United States Senate 

Dear Chairman Grassley: 

Anthrax is a naturally occurring bacterium that causes acute infectious 

disease and is potentially fatal.1

 As you know, in September and October 

2001, the first cases of anthrax bioterrorism occurred in the United States 

when letters containing a powdered form of anthrax were mailed to 

members of the news media and congressional leaders. On October 15, 

2001, one of these letters, addressed to the former Majority Leader of the 

U. S. Senate, was opened in the Hart Senate Office Building in Washington, 

D.C. The letter had contaminated several congressional and other 

buildings along the mail delivery route and elsewhere, and approximately 

30 congressional employees tested positive for anthrax exposure soon 

after. The Hart Senate Office Building is a 10-million-cubic-foot building 

that houses the offices and staffs of 50 senators. As a result of the anthrax 

contamination, the Hart Building and several others on Capitol Hill were 

closed. 

In consultation with the leadership of the Congress, the U.S. Capitol Police 

Board—which oversees the security of the Capitol complex—established 

a team led by an independent “incident commander” to coordinate the 

response to the anthrax incident among several federal and local agencies. 

The team determined that the congressional offices should be 

decontaminated and reopened as expeditiously as possible so that the 

operations of the legislative branch would not be impeded. The 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which removes hazardous 

substances under its Superfund program, had a significant role in the 

cleanup. 

 1

Technically, the term “anthrax” refers to the disease caused by the spore-forming 

bacterium, Bacillus anthracis, and not the bacterium or its spores. In this report, we use 

the term to refer to the bacterium and its spores to reflect terminology commonly used in 

the media and by the general public. 

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, DC 20548 
Page 2 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

As the cleanup of the Capitol Hill anthrax site progressed, EPA’s estimates 

of its cost steadily increased. Consequently, you asked us to examine 

several aspects of EPA’s cleanup. This report describes (1) the costs EPA 

incurred to conduct the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup and how the costs 

were funded, (2) the extent to which EPA awarded the anthrax cleanup 

contracts competitively, (3) EPA’s oversight of the work performed by 

contractors and any suggested changes to EPA’s contracting processes, 

and (4) the extent to which EPA agreed to indemnify contractors against 

liability for potential damages related to the cleanup. 

To conduct our work, we sought contracting documentation relevant to 

the anthrax cleanup from EPA. However, delays in receiving much of this 

documentation considerably extended the time necessary to complete our 

work. Factors contributing to the delay included the need to negotiate and 

then to implement a process established by the Capitol Police Board and 

EPA to address their respective concerns. The Capitol Police Board was 

concerned that the EPA documents might contain sensitive security 

information, and EPA thought that the documents might contain 

confidential business information that it was not authorized to release to 

the Capitol Police Board. As the first step in the process, EPA established 

a reading room for GAO staff to preliminarily review the documents. After 

this review, EPA screened the documents for confidential business 

information and gave them, with certain information redacted, to the 

Capitol Police Board so it could screen for security issues and redact 

sensitive information. After the EPA and Capitol Police Board reviews, 

which took more than 3 months, the documents were given to us. In part 

because of delays in obtaining this contracting information, we surveyed 

63 EPA personnel the agency had identified as having provided contractor 

oversight for the cleanup to obtain information on their oversight roles. 

We received survey responses from 56 people, a response rate of 89 

percent. Our scope and methodology for this review are presented at the 

end of this report. 

EPA spent approximately $27 million to clean up anthrax contamination 

on Capitol Hill, using funding from its Superfund program. To conduct the 

anthrax contamination assessments and the actual decontamination, EPA 

retained the services of many more contractors than it would typically use 

for a single Superfund cleanup site. Specifically, EPA paid 27 contractors 

and three federal and state agencies about $25 million for the Capitol Hill 

anthrax cleanup; the remaining $2 million covered EPA’s personnel costs, 

including travel, primarily for the staff who supervised the contractors. In 

fiscal year 2002, the Congress appropriated about $23 million to replenish 

Results in Brief 
Page 3 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

a substantial portion of the Superfund monies EPA had spent. From the 

outset in October 2001, many uncertainties were associated with the 

cleanup effort, including how to remove anthrax from buildings and how 

much the cleanup would cost. As the nature and extent of the 

contamination became fully known and the solutions to remove and 

properly dispose of the anthrax were agreed upon and carried out, EPA’s 

November 2001 estimate of $5 million proved to be a fraction of what was 

actually needed to conduct the cleanup. With the dedication of substantial 

resources and funding to the cleanup, the objective of reopening the 

decontaminated Capitol Hill office buildings as soon as was safely possible 

was achieved in about 3 months. In contrast, some other buildings that 

were also contaminated with anthrax in the fall of 2001, such as the 

Brentwood postal facility, remain closed as of May 2003. 

Because EPA relied extensively on the existing competitively awarded 

Superfund contracts it routinely uses to address threats posed by the 

release or threatened release of hazardous substances, about 80 percent of 

the contract costs for the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup were incurred 

under competitively awarded technical assessment or hazardous 

substance removal contracts. Specifically, EPA used 10 of its existing 

competitively awarded contracts and 2 new competitively awarded supply 

and security contracts for additional support. Most of the 15 contracts that 

were not competitively awarded were sole-source contracts for under 

$200,000 to obtain supplies and technical, laboratory, and security services 

or to support existing removal contracts. EPA’s Office of Acquisition 

Management authorized the use of sole-source contracts for the cleanup 

on the basis that the emergency situation created an urgent and 

compelling need to obtain services and supplies without going through the 

generally more time-consuming competitive bidding process. For 

additional assistance, EPA also entered into agreements with the U.S. 

Coast Guard, the Department of the Army, and the State of Maryland 

Department of the Environment. 

EPA dedicated significant staff resources to overseeing the many 

contractors working on the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup to ensure that 

their assessment and cleanup work was appropriate and the charges were 

accurate and reasonable. About 150 EPA staff participated in the cleanup, 

including about 50 staff from nine regional offices—called on-scene 

coordinators—who have experience in leading and overseeing emergency 

environmental cleanup operations. The on-scene coordinators oversaw, 

and sometimes assisted with the work of, the contractors during shifts that 

ran 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, for about 3 months. The tasks of the onscene coordinators varied but most often included ensuring that the 
Page 4 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

contractors were on-site and performing assigned tasks efficiently. In 

addition, EPA assigned an administrative specialist to ensure that contract 

charges were accurate and reasonable. This individual reviewed the daily 

charges for four removal contracts, which represented about 41 percent of 

the total contract costs. EPA has conducted four assessments of its 

emergency responses to the anthrax incidents, focusing on or including 

the Capitol Hill site. Overall, these assessments indicated that EPA used its 

contracting capabilities effectively, but they also identified areas in which 

EPA could improve contract support, and EPA has begun taking steps to 

do so. Moreover, our work on the Capitol Hill cleanup revealed areas in 

which oversight of contract costs was not consistent among the regions 

and might be improved. For example, while EPA uses a computerized 

system for tracking contractor costs for removal contracts, this system is 

used on a limited basis for technical contracts that are also used for 

cleanups. If the system—which provides up-to-date cost information 

organized in consistent categories, such as equipment and travel—were 

used consistently, the quality of EPA’s nationwide contract data would be 

improved and its oversight capabilities would likely be enhanced. Toward 

this end, we are recommending that EPA require all the regions to more 

consistently use certain of the practices now used in only some regions. 

EPA agreed to indemnify two contractors that had key roles in the 

fumigation of the Hart Senate Office Building with chlorine dioxide gas 

against liability that could have resulted if a third party had been injured 

by the contractors’ release of a harmful substance, including anthrax and 

chlorine dioxide. Although one of the contractors worked at the site while 

negotiating with EPA for indemnification against such liability, the other 

contractor would not start removal procedures without first receiving 

indemnification. Following 4 weeks of negotiations, EPA reached 

agreement on indemnification with this contractor in November 2001. 

Because the negotiation process occurred at the same time that testing 

was being performed offsite to determine the proper decontamination 

methods to use at the Hart Senate Office Building, the month-long 

negotiation process did not delay the cleanup. However, it potentially 

could have done so. As a result, two of EPA’s assessments of its responses 

to the 2001 terrorist attacks recommended expanding contractor 

indemnification to address counter-terrorism response activities. 

The Capitol Hill anthrax incident occurred a month after the terrorist 

attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, while EPA and other 

federal agencies were continuing to respond to these attacks. The Capitol 

Police Board, which governs the U.S. Capitol Police Force, led the anthrax 

Background 
Page 5 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

cleanup at the Capitol Hill site.2 Consisting at the time of our review of the 

House and Senate Sergeants-at-Arms and the Architect of the Capitol, the 

Board oversees the security of members of the Congress and the Capitol 

buildings, such as the congressional office buildings. The federal entities 

involved in the cleanup—including EPA, the Federal Emergency 

Management Agency, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the 

U.S. Coast Guard, and the Department of the Army—reported to an 

incident commander who was appointed by the Capitol Police Board to 

make decisions on the day-to-day activities of the cleanup. The period 

from October 20, 2001, to November 13, 2001, is characterized as the 

emergency phase, which focused on identifying the extent of anthrax 

contamination; this was followed by the remedial, or cleanup, phase. 

Reporting to the Capitol Police Board’s incident commander, EPA 

managed the decontamination aspects of the cleanup. EPA’s activities at 

the Capitol Hill site included 

• working with other agencies and entities to evaluate the effectiveness 

of potential disinfectants and cleanup technologies, 

• isolating areas to prevent the spread of contamination, 

• sampling to determine and confirm the extent of contamination (see 

fig. 1), 

• evaluating sampling results, 

• removing critical items for special decontamination procedures, and 

• cleaning up the contaminated areas and disposing of decontaminated 

items. 

 2

The cleanup decisions were authorized by EPA in “action memoranda” the agency uses for 

Superfund response decisions. 
Page 6 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

Figure 1: A Sample Is Inserted into a Vial in the Hart Senate Office Building 

At the Capitol Hill site, EPA sampled both surfaces and air in the buildings 

for the presence of anthrax, using three types of surface samples (wet 

swabs and wipes for nonporous surfaces and high efficiency particulate 

arresting (HEPA) vacuuming for porous materials) and four types of air 

samples. Four methods were used to remove anthrax found in 

congressional buildings: fumigating with chlorine dioxide gas, an 

antimicrobial pesticide; disinfecting with a liquid form of chlorine dioxide; 

disinfecting with Sandia foam;3

 and using HEPA vacuuming (see fig. 2). 

During the cleanup, chlorine dioxide gas was identified as the best 

available fumigant for decontaminating parts of the Hart Senate Office 

Building, as well as for fumigating mail and packages. EPA oversaw the 

use of chlorine dioxide gas during three fumigation events in the Hart 

building. 

 3

Sandia foam is a decontaminant that neutralizes chemical and biological agents. 
Page 7 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

Figure 2: Cleanup Personnel Use a HEPA Vacuum in a Congressional Office 

In addition, contractors removed items from congressional offices that 

were critical to congressional operations or personal effects of 

significance. These items were bagged, tagged, and moved for off-site 

decontamination. Approximately 3,250 bags of critical items were 

transported to a company in Richmond, Virginia, for decontamination 

treatment using ethylene oxide. Approximately 4,000 packages and other 

mail were collected from the mail rooms in congressional office buildings 

and also transported off site for decontamination using chlorine dioxide 

gas. In addition, drums of mail were sent to a facility in Lima, Ohio, for 

irradiation treatment. 

The Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup site included 26 buildings, most of them 

located in or near the Capitol Hill area of Washington, D.C. The buildings 
Page 8 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

that required testing for anthrax contamination included congressional 

and judicial buildings; mail facilities; and other nearby buildings, such as 

the Library of Congress. Initial sampling was conducted along the route 

traveled by the letter opened in the Hart Building by tracing the route back 

to the Dirksen Senate Office Building (where the mail for the Senate is 

processed), to the P Street Warehouse (a restricted mail inspection facility 

overseen by the Capitol Police where congressional mail is inspected), and 

finally to the Brentwood postal facility (the U.S. Postal Service mail 

processing and distribution center for Washington, D.C.).4

Samples from 7 of the 26 buildings were found to contain anthrax, which 

required that these 7 undergo more thorough sampling, followed by 

decontamination, and followed then by resampling to confirm that the 

anthrax had been eradicated. In total, approximately 10,000 samples were 

taken at the Capitol Hill site, about half of them from locations in the Hart 

Senate Office Building. EPA advised the Capitol Police Board’s incident 

commander about the extent to which buildings needed to be cleaned to 

make them safe. EPA, along with the Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, the 

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, and other relevant 

authorities, determined that the cleanup standard that would be fully 

protective of public health and the environment was “no detectable, viable 

anthrax spores.” The seven buildings that required decontamination were 

the Dirksen, Hart, and Russell Senate Office Buildings; the Ford and 

Longworth House Office Buildings; the U.S. Supreme Court Building; and 

the P Street Warehouse. Six of the seven buildings were cleared for 

reentry by the end of January 2002. The P Street Warehouse was cleared 

for reentry in March 2002. According to the lead EPA on-scene 

coordinator, no one became sick as a result of exposure to anthrax or 

chemical agents used during decontamination. 

EPA performed its work on the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup under its 

Superfund program pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the National Oil 

and Hazardous Substance Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). Provisions 

of CERCLA, as amended, promote a coordinated federal, state, and local 

response to mitigate situations at sites that may pose an imminent and 

 4

The Brentwood Processing and Distribution Center was renamed the Joseph Curseen, Jr., 

and Thomas Morris, Jr., Processing and Distribution Center in September 2002 in honor of 

two postal employees who died as a result of anthrax exposure at the facility. The facility is 

still commonly referred to as Brentwood. 
Page 9 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

substantial threat to public health or the environment. The NCP is the 

federal government’s blueprint for responding to both oil spills and 

hazardous substance releases. It requires that an on-scene coordinator 

manage the federal response at the scene of a discharge of oil or a release 

of a hazardous substance that poses a threat to public health or the 

environment. The on-scene coordinator coordinates all federal efforts 

with, and provides support and information to, local, state, and regional 

response communities. Depending on where an incident occurs, the onscene coordinator may be either an EPA or U.S. Coast Guard employee. 

EPA’s Superfund work typically involves using agency personnel and 

contractors from 1 of 10 EPA regions located throughout the country that 

have experience with the hazardous substances involved in the incident 

and the methods required to remove them. 

Removal actions are generally short-term, relatively inexpensive responses 

to releases or threats of releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or 

contaminants that pose a danger to human health, welfare, or the 

environment. CERCLA generally limits the cost of a removal action to 

$2 million and the duration to 1 year. However, CERCLA exempts certain 

removal actions from these limitations, such as when continued response 

is required immediately to prevent, limit, or mitigate an emergency. EPA 

approved an emergency exemption to the $2-million statutory limit for the 

Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup on November 5, 2001. 

Typically, EPA provides one on-scene coordinator for a removal site to 

perform an initial assessment of the cleanup work needed, monitor the 

more detailed technical assessment and cleanup work being performed by 

EPA personnel and one or two contractors, and evaluate the results. 

However, the Capitol Hill site response was different from most hazardous 

materials emergency responses in its size and complexity, the nature of 

the contamination, and the requirement that the closed congressional 

buildings be reopened as soon as possible. As a result, EPA had to use a 

large number of on-scene coordinators, major contracts, and other federal 

agencies for assistance. In this case, EPA’s Mid-Atlantic Regional Office 

(Region III) provided the lead on-scene coordinator, who led the agency’s 

cleanup efforts. Region III, along with eight other regions, also provided 

about 50 other on-scene coordinators. Further, unlike most EPA cleanups, 

the lead on-scene coordinator was not in charge of the overall operations 

but instead reported to the incident commander, who in turn reported to 

the Capitol Police Board and House and Senate leaders. 

A substantial portion of the cleanup work at the Capitol Hill site was 

performed from October 2001 through January 2002, with most of the 
Page 10 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

remaining work finished by April 2002. However, some additional costs 

have been incurred, and EPA personnel continued to work on activities 

related to the cleanup after April 2002. For example, the final disposal of 

items used at the cleanup continued after the buildings had been 

reopened. In addition, EPA conducted several internal reviews to identify 

lessons learned from this experience to help the agency prepare for 

responses to other potential biological or chemical weapons attacks. 

According to EPA, the agency expended about $27 million on the Capitol 

Hill anthrax cleanup, using Superfund program funding.5

 Through fiscal 

year 2002 supplemental appropriations acts, the Congress provided EPA 

with additional funding for activities related to terrorism, and EPA 

allocated about $23 million of these funds to reimburse the Superfund 

program for expenditures associated with the Capitol Hill anthrax 

cleanup. Overall, EPA dedicated what it describes as unprecedented 

resources—contract staff and EPA personnel—to accomplish the cleanup 

of the anthrax site safely and effectively. Ninety-three percent of the $27 

million in costs were incurred primarily by EPA contractors who, among 

other things, conducted technical assessments and performed the 

decontamination tasks at the various Capitol Hill sites; the remaining 7 

percent of costs were incurred by EPA personnel, largely for planning and 

overseeing the work of the contractors in accordance with the direction 

provided by the Capitol Police Board. 

Over the course of the cleanup, EPA revised its cost estimates several 

times as the nature and extent of the contamination became fully known 

and the solutions for removing and properly disposing of the anthrax were 

agreed upon and carried out. EPA’s various cost estimates covered the 

contracts and government agreements and generally do not include the 

payroll and travel costs associated with EPA personnel assigned to the 

Capitol Hill site. In November 2001, EPA increased its initial estimate for 

the cleanup to $5 million—more than doubling the initial statutory limit of 

$2 million. EPA revised its estimate for the cleanup five more times to 

continue work necessary to control and mitigate the threat of release of 

anthrax to the environment and to properly dispose of pollutants and 

 5

The expenditures reported are as of March 14, 2003, and were paid under total obligations 

of about $30 million. Obligations are contracts awarded, services received, and similar 

transactions during a given period that will require payment during the same or future 

period. 

EPA Spent About $27 

Million of its 

Superfund Money to 

Clean Up the Capitol 

Hill Anthrax Site 
Page 11 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

contaminants from the site. The last revision—an increase from $25 

million to $28 million—occurred in June 2002. (See table 1.) 

Table 1: EPA Estimated Contract and Government Agreement Cost Increases for 

the Capitol Hill Anthrax Cleanup 

Dollars in millions 

Date approved Amount of increase

New estimated 

contract cost

November 5, 2001 a $5

December 5, 2001 $4 9

December 18, 2001 3 12

January 16, 2002 8 20

February 14, 2002 5 25

June 6, 2002 3 28

Source: EPA. 

a

EPA first authorized spending in excess of the $2 million statutory limit in a November 5, 2001, action 

memorandum. 

EPA adjusted its projections during the course of the cleanup as a result of 

a number of factors generally related to the uniqueness of the situation—

the first use of anthrax as a terrorist weapon in this country. EPA had not 

addressed anthrax contamination in buildings previously and protocols for 

responding to contamination by anthrax or other biological agents did not 

exist. In addition, some scientific and technical information needed to 

properly plan and conduct the anthrax cleanup was not readily available; 

and EPA did not, at that time, have registered antimicrobial agents 

approved for use against anthrax. Also, EPA had not compared the costs 

of candidate decontamination methods. Further, much was—and still is—

unknown about the properties of lab-produced anthrax such as that used 

in this incident, which led to uncertainties about the health risks posed by 

the contamination and how it could spread. As a result, EPA and 

contractors had to develop plans for decontaminating large areas within 

buildings with limited practical knowledge; search for decontamination 

methods; assess their likely efficacy; implement them; and, at times, repeat 

the process if the methods did not work. Finally, EPA was one of a 

number of participants in the decisions made about the work to be done, 

the timing of the work, and the resources needed; it was not the primary 

decision maker as it would be in a typical Superfund cleanup. 

As EPA and contractor staff were beginning their work at the Capitol Hill 

anthrax site, the limitations of existing knowledge about the health risks 

associated with anthrax—such as what amount of exposure could cause 
Page 12 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

illness or death—were becoming more clear. That the Capitol Hill site was 

potentially riskier than initially believed became evident when workers in 

the postal facilities where anthrax-laced letters were processed became ill; 

two of them subsequently died of inhalation anthrax. The scientific and 

medical information initially available to EPA and other agencies indicated 

that workers in postal facilities were not at risk of infection. Further, an 

elderly Connecticut woman—who may have been exposed to mail that 

had been contaminated with anthrax—died from anthrax inhalation, and a 

New York woman whose exposure to anthrax could not be linked to any 

mail or mail facilities also died.6

To accomplish the cleanup safely in the midst of significant scientific and 

technical uncertainty and changing information about how anthrax 

spreads, EPA called on about 150 of its staff in headquarters and the 

regions, incurring agency payroll and travel costs of $1.9 million7

—payroll 

costs amounted to $1.3 million and travel costs to about $600,000.8

According to our analysis of EPA’s Office of the Chief Financial Officer 

records, the majority of payroll and travel costs were incurred by on-scene 

coordinators from EPA’s regions who were overseeing and assisting on 

the cleanup. Further, EPA employed 27 contractors and obtained further 

support from three government agencies at a total cost of about $25 

million to provide assessment and cleanup services. These costs are 

discussed in the next section. 

Because of the magnitude and urgency of the health threat and the high 

priority placed on reopening the congressional buildings as soon as 

possible to mitigate disruptions to the functioning of the federal 

government, the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup conducted by EPA and other 

federal agencies was accomplished fairly quickly, with the majority of 

contaminated buildings opened for business in about 3 months. Without 

 6

Including the four fatalities discussed, the letters contaminated with anthrax caused 23 

illnesses and resulted in five deaths. 

7

We did not validate the personnel costs reported by the Office of the Chief Financial 

Officer. These costs may be somewhat understated because documents we reviewed 

showed that at least five of the on-scene coordinators who worked at the Capitol Hill 

anthrax cleanup for 3 weeks or less were not identified by EPA as having their hours 

worked and/or transportation expenses assigned to the cleanup job. 

8

According to EPA officials, the agency decided to allocate direct personnel costs (salaries 

and travel expenses) to the anthrax cleanup but not indirect costs, such as contract 

management support, which it normally allocates to Superfund cleanups. Under the 

Superfund program, EPA seeks to recover costs from the responsible party or parties. 
Page 13 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

the emphasis on reopening the buildings, for example, the cleanup site 

likely would not have been operated around the clock, 24/7, for months. In 

contrast, testing and decontamination of some buildings at other sites 

have taken much longer. For example, fumigation of the Brentwood postal 

facility was completed in March 2003, and this facility had not reopened as 

of May 2003. In addition, a news media building in Boca Raton, Florida, 

where the first letter containing anthrax was received in September 2001, 

remained closed as of May 2003. 

Almost all of the cleanup expenses–81 percent—paid to EPA’s 27 

contractors and 3 government agencies were incurred under competitively 

awarded contracts. For example, $20.3 million of the approximately $25 

million total expenditures under contracts and government agreements 

were incurred under 10 existing, competitively awarded contracts that 

EPA routinely uses under the Superfund program to respond to releases or 

the threat of releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants 

that may present imminent and substantial danger to the public health or 

welfare. Most of the contracts that were not competitively awarded cost 

less than $200,000 and provided supplies and technical services. For 

additional assistance, EPA also entered into agreements with two federal 

agencies and one state agency. (See fig. 3.) 

Figure 3: Breakout of EPA Contract and Government Agreement Costs 

a

The competitively awarded contracts include $20.3 million expended under 10 existing contracts and 

about $0.1 million under 2 contracts awarded during the cleanup. 

EPA Competitively 

Awarded Most Major 

Contracts Used in the 

Anthrax Cleanup 
Page 14 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

When responding to a release of hazardous substances, EPA first relies on 

its existing Superfund contracts. The Competition in Contracting Act of 

1984 generally requires contracting agencies to obtain full and open 

competition through the use of competitive procedures, the dual purposes 

of which are to ensure that procurements are open to all responsible 

sources and to provide the government with the opportunity to receive fair 

and reasonable prices. In order to respond to emergencies involving 

releases of hazardous substances quickly, EPA issues competitively 

awarded multiyear Superfund contracts so that contractors with the 

necessary expertise are available on short notice when needed. The 10 

EPA regions each negotiate and manage these Superfund contracts for 

work in their geographic area. 

EPA generally uses two types of contracts in an emergency response: 

• technical contracts provide technical assistance for EPA’s site 

assessment and removal activities, and 

• removal contracts provide emergency, time-critical removal services. 

EPA used 10 existing, competitively awarded Superfund contracts for 

most of the technical assessment and anthrax removal at the Capitol Hill 

site: 4 technical contracts, 4 removal contracts, 2 other contracts that 

provided specific technical services and support; and issued 2 additional 

contracts for security services and supplies that were competitively 

awarded. (See table 2.) The 10 existing contracts had been in place for up 

to 4 years when the anthrax incident occurred.9

 While EPA’s Region III 

issued the Superfund contracts that incurred the most costs for the Capitol 

Hill anthrax cleanup, contracts from other regions were also used to 

augment Region III contracting resources. The 10 existing Superfund 

contracts accounted for $20.3 million—or about 80 percent—of the total 

contract and government agreement costs for the Capitol Hill cleanup. 

 9

Most of these contracts are awarded for 5-year terms. 

Competitively Awarded 

Superfund Contracts 
Page 15 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

Table 2: Competitively Awarded Superfund Contracts Used for the Capitol Hill Anthrax Cleanup 

EPA Superfund contract Contract purpose 

Obligated 

amount 

Expended 

amounta

IT Corporation Removal $4,800,000 $3,924,566

Tetra Tech EM, Inc. Technical 4,497,205 4,397,083

Earth Tech, Inc. Removal 3,751,700 3,380,143

Environmental Quality Management, Inc. Removal 3,100,000 2,848,095

CDM Federal Programs Corporation Support 2,500,000 2,075,436

Roy F. Weston, Inc. Technical 1,495,320 1,424,415

Ecology & Environment, Inc. Technical 1,055,261 1,039,601

Lockheed Martin Support 1,000,000 1,000,000

Guardian Environmental Services, Inc. Removal 200,000 116,184

URS Operating Services, Inc. Technical 91,423 91,423

MVM Security & Staffing Services Security services 87,562 87,562

TSI, Inc. Supplies 7,520 7,520

Total $22,585,991 $20,392,028

Source: EPA’s Office of the Chief Financial Officer. 

a

Expenditures as of March 14, 2003. 

The four EPA technical contracts for the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup, 

among other things, provided decontamination plans and sampled for 

anthrax in buildings. According to an EPA contracting official in Region 

III, technical contracts typically account for about 10 percent of total 

contract costs at a cleanup site. However, technical contracts costs for the 

Capitol Hill site totaled about $7 million—or about 28 percent of the total 

contract costs. 

The four EPA removal contracts for the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup 

provided personnel, equipment, and materials to remove items from the 

site for safekeeping, decontaminate areas where anthrax was found, and 

dispose of contaminated items. These removal contracts also provided 

equipment and personnel to conduct sampling because of the large 

amount of samples that were required and the short time frames involved. 

The four EPA removal contract costs totaled about $10 million. 
Page 16 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

The other existing EPA contracts provided either specific technical 

services or support. One contract, which provides engineering and 

analytical services to EPA, monitored the air to ensure that potentially 

harmful decontamination chemicals were not released outside the area in 

which they were being used. Another contract, typically used for long-term 

Superfund cleanups known as remedial cleanups, provided additional 

technical support, including sampling analysis and data evaluation at the 

site. These two contracts totaled $3 million. 

Federal contracting laws that generally require EPA to use a competitive 

bidding process permit some exceptions to this requirement, including 

emergency situations where there is an unusual or compelling urgency for 

obtaining the necessary supplies or services. On this basis, in November 

2001, EPA’s Office of Acquisition Management gave the EPA contracting 

officers the authority to enter into contracts for the Capitol Hill anthrax 

site without using the normal competitive bidding process. Overall, EPA 

used 15 noncompetitively awarded contracts—that is, sole-source 

contracts—for supplies and for technical, removal, and laboratory services 

to support the cleanup of the Capitol Hill anthrax site. As shown in table 3, 

costs for three of the sole-source contracts exceeded $200,000, and many 

of them were for considerably less. 

Noncompetitively Awarded 

Contracts 
Page 17 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

Table 3: Noncompetitively Awarded EPA Contracts Used for the Capitol Hill Anthrax Cleanup 

Contract Contract purpose 

Obligated 

amount

Expended 

amounta

 

Kemron Environmental Services, Inc.b Removal $2,421,800 $2,119,650

HMHTTC Response Team, Inc. Removal 900,000 900,000

Southwest Research Institute Laboratory 383,085 383,085

University of California—Berkeley Sponsored Projects 

Office 

Technical 182,075 182,075

Silva Consulting Services, LLC Technical 165,000 158,100

Science Applications International Corporationb Technical 132,359 28,630

Biomarine, Inc. Supplies 81,147 65,647

Envirofoam Technologies, Inc. Supplies 52,405 52,405

Safeware, Inc. Supplies 49,450 49,450

Airgas Safety Supplies 31,756 30,992

Sabre Oxidation Technologies, Inc. Technical 21,950 19,850

U.S. Art Company, Inc. Technical 12,842 12,842

Mine Safety Appliancesb Supplies 12,446 12,446

Coastal Safety & Health Services, Inc. Supplies 11,025 11,025

New Horizons Diagnostics Corporation Supplies 5,717 5,717

Total $4,463,057 $4,031,914

Source: EPA’s Office of the Chief Financial Officer. 

a

Expenditures as of March 14, 2003. 

b

GSA federal supply schedule contract. 

The largest noncompetitive contract used for the cleanup was with 

Kemron Environmental Services, Inc. Kemron provided EPA with HEPA 

vacuuming services, one of the four methods used to remove anthrax at 

the Capitol Hill site. EPA obtained the services of Kemron under the GSA 

federal supply schedule, relying on GSA’s determination that the prices 
Page 18 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

offered under the GSA contract were fair and reasonable.10 The second 

largest noncompetitive contract was with the removal contractor 

HMHTTC Response Team, which provided additional workers in 

December 2001 to relieve the removal contractors who had worked at the 

site since October. The other sole-source contract over $200,000 was with 

Southwest Research Institute, a laboratory that analyzed spore strips used 

to test for anthrax after the decontamination efforts. This particular 

laboratory was selected because it was familiar with the protocol 

developed by the technical consultant who developed the spore strips. In 

addition, according to EPA officials, the lab could handle the quantity of 

spore strips the cleanup generated, it promised a quick turnaround time, 

and the fee was reasonable. 

The other noncompetitively awarded contracts used at the Capitol Hill site 

were for supplies needed for the contractors working at the site, such as 

respirators, air quality meters, and sampling kits, and for technical and 

removal and laboratory services. For example, one technical contractor, 

U.S. Art Company, Inc., provided advice regarding the removal and 

decontamination of art objects in the Capitol Hill buildings. 

Appendix I provides details on the tasks performed under the 

competitively and noncompetitively awarded contracts. 

EPA obtained further support through two federal interagency agreements 

and one state agreement. EPA amended an existing interagency agreement 

with the U.S. Coast Guard to respond quickly to the Capitol Hill anthrax 

contamination. The U.S. Coast Guard National Strike Force provided 

tactical entry teams, specialized equipment, management support, and a 

deputy to the incident commander during the emergency phase of the 

cleanup. EPA also entered into a new interagency agreement with the U.S. 

Department of the Army for waste incineration services at Fort Detrick, 

Maryland. In addition, EPA used the State of Maryland Department of the 

 10Under the Federal Supply Schedule, GSA awards contracts to multiple companies 

supplying comparable products and services after determining that the prices negotiated 

were fair and reasonable. Federal agencies may use the supply schedule to purchase 

commercial services requiring a statement of work but are responsible for determining that 

the total contract prices are fair and reasonable, considering the level of effort and mix of 

labor skills needed to perform specific tasks. Agencies ordering services that require a 

statement of work are to transmit their requests for services to at least three contractors. 

However, EPA awarded this contract without soliciting bids from three contractors on the 

basis that there was an unusual and compelling need to obtain the services without delay. 

Agreements with 

Government Agencies 
Page 19 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

Environment to review work plans and help coordinate EPA’s removal and 

disposal of anthrax. (See table 4.) 

Table 4: Agreements with Federal and State Agencies Used for the Capitol Hill 

Anthrax Cleanup 

Entity 

Obligated 

amount

Expended 

amounta

 

U.S. Coast Guard $900,000 $635,254

Department of the Army-U.S. Medical 

Command 

274,141 241,141

State of Maryland Department of the 

Environment 

1,500 1,500

Total $1,175,641 $877,895

Source: EPA’s Office of the Chief Financial Officer. 

a

Expenditures as of March 14, 2003. 

EPA dedicated significant staff resources to overseeing the many 

contractors working on the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup. Specifically, 

about 50 EPA staff ensured the contractors were on site and performing 

assigned tasks appropriately. In addition, EPA assigned an administrative 

specialist to ensure contract charges were accurate and reasonable. After 

the cleanup, EPA assessed its response to the Capitol Hill anthrax incident 

and concluded that, overall, it had effectively used its contracting 

resources. However, EPA also identified ways it could improve contract 

support for potential future emergency responses. Moreover, our review of 

the Capitol Hill anthrax incident revealed inconsistencies in oversight 

practices that could affect the quality of EPA’s contract cost oversight, 

such as the extent to which regions use the computerized cost-tracking 

system, the extent to which they assign dedicated administrative 

specialists to cleanup sites to oversee costs, and regions’ varying 

approaches to reviewing cost reports for technical contracts. 

EPA used emergency technical assessment and hazardous substance 

removal contractors to conduct the cleanup and dedicated significant staff 

resources to overseeing their work. Reporting to the Capitol Police Board, 

EPA staff provided extensive technical expertise in anthrax detection and 

removal to ensure that the Capitol Hill cleanup protected public health and 

the environment. In all, according to EPA’s Office of the Chief Financial 

Officer’s payroll list, about 150 EPA staff participated in the anthrax 

EPA Devoted 

Extensive Resources 

to Overseeing 

Contractors’ Work, 

yet Some Contracting 

Changes Would Better 

Support EPA 

Cleanups 

Staff Oversaw Contractors’ 

Work to Ensure It Was 

Appropriate and Charges 

Were Accurate and 

Reasonable 
Page 20 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

cleanup, including about 50 staff from nine regional offices who are 

experienced in leading and overseeing emergency environmental cleanup 

operations—the on-scene coordinators—and several staff from EPA’s 

Environmental Response Team who also have experience in emergency 

cleanup operations.11

The on-scene coordinators oversaw, and sometimes assisted with, the 

work of the contractors during shifts that ran 24 hours a day, 7 days a 

week, for about 3 months. Fifty-six EPA staff whose responsibilities at the 

Capitol Hill site included overseeing contractors responded to our survey 

about the oversight activities they performed. They reported that their 

tasks varied but that the task they most frequently carried out was 

overseeing contractors.12 Specifically, the EPA respondents to our survey 

spent, on average, 

• 53 percent of their time overseeing contractors; 

• 18 percent researching and developing technical plans; 

• 13 percent coordinating with other federal agencies on the 

administration of the cleanup; and 

• 14 percent on “other activities,” such as conducting pilot studies for the 

decontamination effort, sampling for anthrax, and organizing and 

administering cleanup activities. 

The EPA staff who reported overseeing contractors spent, on average, 54 

percent of their time observing contractors to ensure they were on site and 

working on assigned tasks efficiently. These staff also spent, on average, 

17 percent of their time reviewing the results of contractors’ work, and 8 

percent of their time preparing daily or weekly work plans. Less 

frequently, staff who reported oversight activities also monitored delivery 

and quality of supplies, reviewed cost documents, and approved hours 

worked by contract personnel. 

 11The Environmental Response Team assists EPA regions and other federal agencies 

responding to environmental emergencies by providing a wide range of technical expertise 

and equipment. 

12Forty-six of the survey respondents were on-scene coordinators. 
Page 21 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

While EPA staff who reviewed cost documents spent, on average, 3 

percent of their time reviewing cost documents, one person—a site 

administrative officer—spent 100 percent of his time reviewing cost 

documents. As discussed in the following section, Region III generally uses 

site administrative officers to review both technical and removal contract 

costs in detail and to document these reviews before the on-scene 

coordinator reviews and approves them, thereby easing the cost-review 

workload of on-scene coordinators and allowing them to focus more on 

other cleanup management tasks and issues. 

At the Capitol Hill anthrax site, the site administrative officer reviewed the 

daily charges for four of the six removal contracts, which represented 

about 41 percent of the total contract costs.13 These reviews involved 

verifying the hours the contractor staff worked by comparing the hours 

billed with the hours recorded in sign-in sheets; reviewing travel costs to 

ensure they were within federal guidelines and reviewing other 

expenditures of contractor staff, such as telephone charges to ensure they 

were allowable. The review work papers provide documentation of the 

cost reviews performed. 

According to EPA officials, the technical contractors did not have 

sufficient staff on site to provide daily cost reports, and the site 

administrative officer, therefore, did not review the daily costs of the 

technical contracts at the Capitol Hill site. EPA requires reviews of the 

monthly cost reports from technical contractors before they are approved 

for payment by project officers in the regions; the reviews are generally 

performed by the on-scene coordinator at the site. However, we could not 

determine the extent to which the costs of the largest technical contract, 

which was managed by Region III, were reviewed by on-scene 

coordinators at the Capitol Hill site because the project officer responsible 

had retired, and EPA staff could not locate any documentation of reviews 

that had been requested or performed. As discussed further below, Region 

III implemented a new review process in 2002 that requires such 

documentation. 

 13The site administrative officer did not review the costs associated with the other two 

removal contracts—a GSA federal supply contract and a noncompetitive contract awarded 

for a limited period of time—on a daily basis because the contractors had not input these 

into the computerized cost tracking system used for the review. 
Page 22 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

EPA conducted four assessments that either focused on or included the 

Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup; the reports resulting from each follow: 

• Regional Lessons Learned from the Capitol Hill Anthrax Response, 

March 2002; 

• 60-Day Counter-Terrorism Contracting Assessment Final Report, 

May 2002; 

• Federal On-Scene Coordinator’s After Action Report for the Capitol 

Hill Site, August 2002; and 

• Challenges Faced During the Environmental Protection Agency’s 

Response to Anthrax and Recommendations for Enhancing Response 

Capabilities: A Lessons Learned Report, September 2002.14

One of these reviews, the 60-day counter-terrorism contracting assessment 

report, focused exclusively on the capability of EPA’s existing emergency 

response contracting network to respond to terrorist incidents, while the 

other three addressed a range of issues, such as operations and 

management, communications and coordination, health and safety, and 

the resources available to EPA. The overarching purpose of the four 

reviews was to derive lessons learned from EPA’s responses to the 

anthrax incidents in order to improve the agency’s ability to handle the 

kind of threats associated with large terrorist incidents. In this regard, 

while EPA concluded the cleanup was a success because the anthrax on 

Capitol Hill was removed efficiently and safely in the face of numerous 

and unprecedented challenges, the reports include a wide range of 

recommendations aimed at improving EPA’s response capabilities. 

Regarding contracting, the four reviews found that the agency’s emergency 

response contracting network met the response and procurement needs at 

the Capitol Hill site, but they also identified suggestions or 

recommendations for EPA to improve contract support for potential 

future responses. The lessons learned and recommendations included in 

the counter-terrorism contracting assessment report generally address the 

contracting issues that were identified in the broader reviews as well. 

 14This report focused largely on the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup but also included EPA’s 

roles in other anthrax incidents, such as at other federal facilities. 

EPA’s Assessments of Its 

Response to the Capitol 

Hill Anthrax Incident 

Identified Contracting 

Issues, Which EPA Is 

Addressing 
Page 23 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

The counter-terrorism contracting assessment report developed 13 

recommendations, 9 of which it identified as the most urgent. These highpriority recommendations include the following: 

• Facilitate counter-terrorism equipment acquisition and maintenance by 

compiling a national vendor database of sources of counter-terrorism 

equipment, supplies, and services. 

• Create a strike team of headquarters and regional contracting officers 

and project officers that will be available for deployment 24/7 in the 

event of an emergency to assist with emergency procurement needs. 

• Increase the administrative support provided to on-scene coordinators 

during a major terrorism-related response by, for example, providing 

staff to review daily cost reports, review invoices, and process on-site 

paperwork. 

According to its April 21, 2003, status report of emergency response 

contracting activities, EPA has completed or is currently taking steps to 

address the contracting recommendations in the counter-terrorism 

contracting report. Regarding the three recommendations discussed 

above, EPA has done the following: 

• EPA has developed counter-terrorism equipment warehouse contracts 

for most of its regions. 

• EPA developed a final draft document on establishing a national 

contract support team and released it within EPA for review on April 

18, 2003. 

• The workgroup addressing the need for administrative support for onscene coordinators is working on a list of specific administrative 

support tasks that are required. 

The next section of this report discusses some other areas in which EPA’s 

contracting oversight might be improved that we identified during our 

review of the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup. 
Page 24 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

As a result of the convergence of EPA staff from nine of its regions at the 

Capitol Hill site, regional differences in contractor oversight were 

highlighted. Three oversight differences concern contract cost data and 

the review of these costs. First, regions vary in the way they use a 

computerized contract cost-tracking system called the Removal Cost 

Management System. All regions use the system for removal contracts; 

however, some regions also use it for some technical contracts also used 

at cleanup sites. Second, some regions require that invoice reviews be 

documented before payments are made; other regions have no such 

requirement. Third, regarding cost reviews, some regions hire 

administrative specialists to conduct detailed daily on-site reviews of 

contract costs in support of the on-scene coordinator, while others only 

rely on the on-scene coordinator to both manage cleanups and review and 

approve the contract costs.15

In 1988, to better support Superfund program management, EPA 

developed a computerized cost-tracking system for cleanups so the agency 

could obtain consistent documentation from contractors at all sites in a 

timely and efficient manner. Specific anticipated benefits included timely 

tracking of total costs to ensure that cleanup projects would not exceed 

authorized amounts, more efficient invoice verification, and the ability to 

develop more accurate cost estimates for cleanups. The tracking system 

provides up-to-date cost information organized under the main categories 

of “personnel,” “equipment,” and “other field costs;” the system further 

breaks “other field costs” into such subcategories as materials and 

supplies, travel, lodging, per diem, and subcontracts. Thus, to the extent 

that regions require contractors to input daily contract costs into the 

system, EPA can readily monitor total costs as well as individual cost 

categories on a daily basis. Daily cost information supports oversight 

better than monthly information because it allows timely, on-site reviews 

of costs that can uncover inefficient or excessive use of labor and 

equipment. 

While a 1989 memorandum requiring the use of the tracking system 

indicated that all site costs were to be input into the system, generally only 

the costs associated with removal contracts are entered daily into the 

system. For example, on the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup, the 

 15Generally on-scene coordinators review and approve costs for removal contracts and 

review costs for technical contracts; project officers generally approve costs for technical 

contracts. 

Certain Oversight 

Practices That Could 

Enhance EPA’s Oversight 

Are Used in Some, but Not 

All, Regions 

Computerized Cost-Tracking 

System 
Page 25 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

expenditures ($10.2 million) for the four multi-year removal contracts 

were input into the system, but the expenditures ($7 million) for the four 

multi-year technical contracts were not. According to EPA officials, part of 

the rationale for inputting removal contract costs into the system is that 

the type of contract used—“time and materials” contracts—requires more 

oversight than some other contract types, such as fixed-price contracts. 

That is, the removal contracts provide for specific labor rates but do not 

specify the number of hours that may be applied under the contracts. 

Most of the technical contracts currently used by the regions are cost 

reimbursement contracts and a few are fixed-priced contracts. Further, 

the fixed-priced contracts used by the regions will include a cost 

reimbursement portion that may cover activities such as contractor travel 

and subcontracts, according to a Region III contract official. For example, 

the cost reimbursement portion of one of the fixed-price technical 

contracts used for the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup was substantial—about 

half of the contract cost of $4.4 million was invoiced under the cost 

reimbursement portion, according to a Region III contract official. 16 As 

with work performed on a time-and-materials basis, cost-reimbursement 

work requires appropriate surveillance during performance to provide 

reasonable assurance that efficient methods and effective cost controls 

are used. In addition, the technical contracts support work at numerous 

cleanup sites, and EPA also needs to track site-specific costs as well as 

total contract costs. However, because EPA does not consistently use the 

contractor cost-tracking system to track the costs incurred under its 

technical contracts, complete and consistent cost data on specific cleanup 

sites are not readily available. 

Although EPA generally does not use the tracking system for technical 

contract costs, individual on-scene coordinators in some regions have 

required that these costs, as well as others, such as those incurred by state 

and federal agencies, be entered into the system. According to two such 

on-scene coordinators with whom we spoke, a key benefit of using the 

tracking system is that it gives them timely information on costs which 

helps them oversee and manage the work. According to an environmental 

engineer with EPA’s Environmental Response Team, the benefits of using 

 16This and the other Region III technical contract were negotiated as fixed-price contracts 

with cost reimbursement provisions. Under these contracts, contractors provide EPA with 

“dedicated teams” that provide technical assistance at set monthly rates for up to a 

predetermined amount of time; additional time may be provided at fixed hourly rates; and 

other specialized personnel and contractor travel and subcontracting are included among 

the items that are paid under the cost reimbursement provisions. 
Page 26 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

the tracking system for all of the contracts would include having 

consistent cost data about each cleanup site in one place, thereby enabling 

the agency to quickly respond to the numerous site-specific questions 

frequently asked by EPA management, the Congress, the Office of 

Management and Budget, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, 

and others. For example, using the tracking system one can quickly break 

out the expenditures into individual cost categories. The four Capitol Hill 

contracts entered into the tracking system include, in the aggregate, 

personnel costs of $2.8 million, lodging costs of $1.6 million, and per diem 

costs of $0.6 million. Using the tracking system, analyses of contract cost 

categories can be performed on individual contracts and individual sites. 

However, because technical contracts generally are not included in the 

tracking system, information on individual cost categories for the entire 

cleanup is incomplete. 

EPA’s Contracts Management Manual describes responsibilities and 

procedures for processing contractors’ invoices. Contract invoices are to 

be reviewed thoroughly for cost reasonableness and to be processed in a 

timely manner. While the guidance may be tailored to specific contracts 

and the use of checklists is optional, EPA’s policy requires documentation 

to show that the appropriate reviews have been performed. The manual 

defines the roles of the various staff involved in reviewing and approving 

invoices. Among the key personnel in this process are the EPA staff who 

oversee the actual contract work17—primarily on-scene coordinators in the 

case of the Capitol Hill anthrax site—and the project officer. In general, 

the staff who oversee the work are responsible for reviewing individual 

contract costs for reasonableness and informing the project officers of any 

problems with the costs, such as excess hours charged. The project 

officers are responsible for reviewing contract invoices for payment and 

completing and submitting invoice approval forms to EPA’s financial 

management center for payment. The contract invoices for the removal 

and technical contracts are typically highly detailed and presented in 

varying formats. 

Invoice reviews for removal contracts are generally more standardized 

across EPA than the invoice reviews for the technical contracts. Regions 

use varying invoice review approaches for the technical contracts. For 

example, beginning in November 2002, EPA Region III established a new 

 17EPA staff overseeing the work are referred to as “work assignment managers” in the EPA 

manual. 

Documentation of Invoice 

Reviews 
Page 27 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

process for reviewing invoices of technical contracts: the relevant EPA 

staff who oversaw or are overseeing the work at the sites receive monthly 

site-specific invoices from contractors, and the EPA staff are required to 

provide a written statement to the EPA project officer either indicating 

agreement with the costs or identifying questions about them. Region III 

revised its invoice review process after a new project officer with prior 

auditing experience was hired. This individual proposed the change to 

better ensure that invoices were reviewed by the on-site person familiar 

with the work that was performed—such as the on-scene coordinator—

and that the review was documented before invoices were paid. Similarly, 

Regions V and IX send forms requiring responses to questions about the 

invoices, along with the monthly invoices, and require the work 

assignment managers overseeing the contract work to return the 

completed forms to the project officers. 

However, before this change, and during the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup, 

Region III did not require written certification of invoice reviews. Region 

III’s earlier approach is similar to the one currently used in Region IV, 

where the project officer sends monthly invoices to the EPA work 

assignment managers for review and asks them to respond if they have 

concerns. Lacking a response from an EPA work assignment manager, the 

project officer approves the invoice for payment after a specified date. In 

these cases, the agency does not have documentation of the appropriate 

invoice reviews by the EPA staff who oversaw the contract work. Another 

variation is used in Region X: the project officer approves the monthly 

invoices without providing the EPA work assignment manager the 

opportunity to review them for reasonableness. As a result, the review is 

performed by an individual who did not oversee the work rather than by 

on-site staff who know the specifics of the work performed. 

EPA’s on-scene coordinators generally are responsible for managing all 

aspects of emergency environmental cleanups: organizing, directing, and 

documenting cleanup actions.18 Specific tasks include conducting field 

investigations, monitoring on-scene activities, and overseeing the cleanup 

actions. The on-scene coordinator is also the individual with primary 

responsibility for ensuring that cleanup costs are managed and tracked as 

the cleanup progresses. The cost reviews that are required to ensure that 

 18As discussed, at the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup, EPA’s lead on-scene coordinator 

reported to the Capitol Police Board, and about 50 on-scene coordinators worked at the 

site during the cleanup. 

Dedicated Administrative 

Specialists to Review Costs 
Page 28 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

EPA approves only reasonable and allowable costs are detailed and timeconsuming. An EPA cost management principle for the Superfund 

program is that costs can be managed and documented most effectively 

from the cleanup site as they occur. However, EPA’s Removal Cost 

Management Manual recognizes that the demands on the on-scene 

coordinator’s time and attention are great and that, therefore, some cost 

management responsibilities have to be delegated to other on-site or offsite personnel. 

To address this workload issue, Region III established an administrative 

position to provide on-site cost management support to its on-scene 

coordinators. As discussed earlier, one of Region III’s site administrative 

officers19 worked on site at the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup, supporting 

the lead on-scene coordinator essentially full-time from October 2001 

through April 2002 and part-time for several more months. As a result, the 

daily costs for four removal contracts were examined, contractor hours 

were traced back to sign-in sheets, and equipment deliveries and uses 

confirmed. The lead on-scene coordinator could not have conducted these 

detailed cost reviews because of other demands, and the other on-scene 

coordinators on site (many of whom were assigned to the site for only 

several weeks) also were involved overseeing the work being performed 

and would not have been able to conduct timely, detailed cost reviews. 

Also, as discussed above, one of the lessons EPA learned from its 

assessments of its responses to the recent terrorist attacks, including the 

anthrax incidents, is that the agency needs to provide more administrative 

support to its on-scene coordinators who are responding to threats 

associated with terrorist incidents. The 60-Day Counter-Terrorism 

Contracting Assessment Final Report specifically said that on-scene 

coordinators need increased support to review daily cost reports and 

invoices and to process paperwork on-site. Although EPA’s Region III 

provides cost management support to its on-scene coordinators on a 

routine basis, most of the regions do not have positions dedicated to assist 

on-scene coordinators with their cost management responsibilities and, 

therefore, do not have trained support staff readily available to augment 

large or complex emergency cleanup efforts. Region III, which was 

responsible for the contracting for the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup, has 

three such positions and was able to provide a site administrative officer 

 19Region III refers to this position as site administrative officer or field administrative 

specialist. 
Page 29 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

to perform detailed cost reviews of removal contracts at the Capitol Hill 

site. Region II also has three similar positions. Five other regions we 

contacted do not have a similar position.20

People in or near the contaminated Capitol Hill buildings could have been 

harmed by anthrax that was not successfully removed or by a release of 

the chemicals used to decontaminate the buildings. For example, the 

decontaminant used in the fumigation cleanup method—chlorine dioxide 

gas—may irritate the respiratory tract at low concentrations and is fatal at 

high concentrations. In many cases, contractors can obtain pollution 

liability insurance to cover harm to third parties that may arise from 

cleanup activities; in other cases, the cost of such insurance may be 

prohibitive. In the case of the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup, two 

contractors with key roles in the fumigation of the Hart Senate Office 

Building informed EPA that they were not able to obtain such insurance at 

a reasonable cost, and they requested indemnification. As discussed 

below, EPA agreed to provide the indemnification authorized by CERCLA 

to the two contractors, protecting them from the financial liability that 

could result if a third party were injured by the contractors’ release of a 

harmful substance, including anthrax. 

For example, numerous uncertainties about the use of chlorine dioxide 

gas for this task existed, and IT Corporation—which was tasked to 

fumigate the Hart office building using chlorine dioxide gas—would not 

start removal procedures without receiving indemnification from EPA 

against liability for damages. According to EPA officials, chlorine dioxide 

had not been used previously for removing anthrax or for fumigating such 

a large area. After EPA determined that IT Corporation and three of its 

subcontractors supplying the fumigation chemicals and technologies had 

diligently sought insurance and none was available at a reasonable price, 

in November 2001, the agency agreed to provide them with 

indemnification. Specifically, EPA agreed to compensate IT Corporation 

and its three subcontractors up to $90 million if they were deemed liable 

for damages caused by a negligent release of a hazardous substance, 

pollutant, or contaminant, including but not limited to anthrax and 

chlorine dioxide. According to EPA officials, the negotiations for the 

indemnification agreement were completed in about 4 weeks. The 

indemnification does not cover liability for intentional misconduct or 

 20We contacted regions II, III, IV, V, VIII, IX, and X. 

EPA Negotiated 

Indemnification 

Agreements with Two 

Contractors to 

Address Their 

Liability Concerns 
Page 30 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

gross negligence. It appears that the cleanup was handled without harmful 

incidents occurring. According to EPA officials, neither IT Corporation nor 

the subcontractors have sought compensation under the indemnification 

agreement. 

In December 2001, after the agreement with IT Corporation was in place, 

another contractor supporting the fumigation requested and obtained 

indemnification. CDM Federal Programs Corporation (CDM), whose 

responsibilities included placing the materials to test for the presence of 

anthrax during fumigation, received indemnification terms similar to those 

granted IT Corporation but with significantly lower compensation 

amounts. Specifically, EPA agreed to compensate CDM up to $1 million if 

it were deemed liable for damages caused by a negligent release of a 

hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant, including but not limited 

to anthrax. This indemnification also does not extend to liability arising 

from intentional misconduct or gross negligence. Negotiations for this 

agreement built on the previously negotiated agreement with IT 

Corporation, and, according to EPA officials, were accomplished in about 

a week. CDM was already working at the site when it requested 

indemnification and continued to work while the negotiations were in 

process. 

Although IT Corporation required that an indemnification agreement be in 

place before it would begin the decontamination of the Hart building, the 

cleanup itself was not delayed because other issues needed to be resolved 

before IT Corporation started the fumigation process. For example, tests 

had to be conducted and then reviewed by EPA, the Capitol Police Board, 

and others to confirm that chlorine dioxide had the antimicrobial 

properties to effectively destroy anthrax. By the time open issues were 

resolved and the decontamination could begin, EPA had reached its 

agreement with IT Corporation and its subcontractors. However, in other 

emergency cleanups, such negotiations could delay the start of 

decontamination work. In this regard, EPA has concluded that in the 

future, a more expedient way to indemnify contractors for emergency 

situations such as anthrax incidents needs to be in place to prevent delays. 

In fact, two of the EPA reviews of its responses to the anthrax incidents 

recommended that EPA take steps to expand contractor liability 

indemnification to address counter-terrorism response activities. Once 

Subtitle G of the recently enacted Homeland Security Act of 2002 is fully 

implemented, agency officials believe that their emergency response 

contractors will face little or no legal liability to injured third parties if the 

contractors use qualified antiterrorism technologies previously approved 

by the Secretary of Homeland Security. According to an EPA official, if 
Page 31 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

this act had been in effect at the time of the anthrax cleanup, and the 

Department of Homeland Security had approved the chlorine dioxide 

technology, the contractor would not have needed any indemnification 

protection. 

In about 3 months and without harm to emergency response workers or 

congressional staff, EPA, the Capitol Police Board, and others planned and 

successfully conducted the first cleanup of office buildings contaminated 

by a lethal form of anthrax that had caused several deaths elsewhere. 

Moreover, EPA has taken the initiative to study its response actions to 

better prepare itself for other emergency cleanups, including other 

potential terrorism attacks, and has identified areas in which it could 

improve. Despite the success of the cleanup, our review identified certain 

inconsistencies in EPA’s contractor cost oversight that may affect its 

quality. First, regarding tracking contract costs, because few regions use 

the cost-tracking system for technical as well as removal contracts, EPA 

does not have readily accessible, consistent contracting data on its 

cleanup sites. One result of this lack is that the agency was unable to 

readily respond to your questions about the costs of this cleanup, 

including the categories of expenditures—how much was spent on 

personnel, travel, equipment, and so on. In addition, EPA has less 

assurance that it is providing effective, consistent oversight of its 

contracts. Second, because EPA has not ensured that all of its regions 

document the reviews of contractor invoices conducted by cognizant onsite officials, the agency’s ability to ensure that contractors’ charges are 

accurate and reasonable is lessened. Finally, on-scene coordinators face 

many competing demands; therefore, their reviews of costs may be less 

timely than those that can be provided by a specialist working on site to 

support the on-scene coordinators’ cost reviews. Such administrative 

support could provide EPA with better assurance that its payments to 

contractors are appropriately reviewed and adjusted on a routine basis. It 

could also be readily called upon to conduct these cost reviews during 

large and complex emergency cleanups, such as those that may stem from 

terrorism. 

To enhance its ability to ensure that the agency is providing effective and 

efficient contractor oversight, we recommend that the Administrator of 

EPA direct the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response to require 

• the regions to track and monitor both technical and removal contract 

cost data in the agency’s computerized cost-tracking system and 

Conclusions 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action 
Page 32 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

• the on-site staff who are responsible for reviewing contractor cleanup 

costs to certify that they have done so before the costs are approved 

for payment. 

In addition, we recommend that the Administrator direct the Office of 

Solid Waste and Emergency Response to examine whether more or all of 

the regions should hire specialists—either EPA or contractor staff—to 

support the on-scene coordinators by providing timely, detailed reviews of 

contract costs. If EPA uses contractor staff for this purpose, the agency 

will need to provide appropriate contract oversight and ensure that 

potential conflicts of interest are identified and mitigated. 

We provided copies of our draft report to EPA for review and comment. In 

commenting on the draft, the Director of the Contract Management Center 

in the Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Office of Solid Waste 

and Emergency Response, agreed to (1) consider adding the technical 

contracts to the computerized cost-tracking system as the agency awards 

the next round of these multiyear contracts and (2) ensure all regions 

coordinate with on-site staff for invoice reviews prior to approval. The 

Director also said that EPA is currently examining providing additional 

administrative support at cleanup sites and is considering using contractor 

support when in-house positions are not available. 

One of the considerations the Director of the Contract Management Center 

cited regarding the inclusion of the technical contracts in the cost-tracking 

system is that reengineering the system to fit the different types of 

technical contracts that EPA uses might involve a considerable expense 

for the agency. Further, while she acknowledged that the cost tracking 

system may be particularly applicable when the technical contractors are 

involved in removal (cleanup) activities, she said the additional cost of 

using the system may not be justified in some cases, such as for finite 

work performed under a negotiated work plan or a fixed level of effort. 

However, we believe reengineering costs may not be a barrier to using the 

system for both technical and removal contracts. Specifically, the system 

is already being used to track the costs of some of EPA’s technical 

contracts. Further, an EPA environmental engineer with extensive 

experience working with the tracking system told us that changes to the 

system would not be required to add technical contracts. In addition, 

effective oversight of both time-and-materials work and costreimbursement work is essential to ensure costs are reasonable and 

accurate. However, currently the tracking system is used to support the 

on-site review of the time-and-materials work done under the removal 

Agency Comments 

and Our Response 
Page 33 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

contracts but not for the contract-reimbursement work done under the 

technical contracts. We believe that the existing tracking system offers 

EPA an economical vehicle for enhancing both its contracting data and its 

contractor oversight by including the technical contracts in the cost 

tracking system as was envisioned when the system was developed. 

Regarding our recommendation that the on-site staff responsible for 

reviewing contractor invoices certify that they have done so before the 

costs are approved for payment, the Director agreed to require all EPA 

regions to coordinate their invoice reviews with the on-site staff before 

approving invoices for payment. If EPA requires the reviewers in all the 

regions to certify their invoice reviews—as we recommend and as some 

EPA regions currently do—the agency will be fully responsive to our 

recommendation. Such a requirement will provide greater assurance that 

the invoices EPA approves are accurate and reasonable. 

EPA told us that it is currently examining the issue of additional 

administrative support at cleanup sites by either EPA staff or contractors, 

and we have revised our recommendation to take into account concerns 

that would arise if EPA delegated its contract cost review function to 

contractors. 

EPA agreed that the information the report provides on the 

indemnification agreements that the agency negotiated with two 

contractors is accurate but suggested that the report also discuss the 

limitations of the indemnification that EPA can provide under CERCLA. 

As our report accurately addresses the extent to which EPA agreed to 

indemnify contractors against liability for potential damages related to the 

cleanup, we believe that a broader discussion of indemnification issues is 

not necessary. 

To determine the costs to EPA of removing anthrax from the Capitol Hill 

site, we obtained and reviewed cost information from the agency’s Office 

of the Chief Financial Officer. We discussed cleanup estimates and 

contract costs for the Capitol Hill anthrax site with EPA financial and 

contract staff. We also obtained detailed cost information on four of EPA’s 

removal contracts that was available from EPA’s Removal Cost 

Management System, the database that tracks costs by site and cost 

categories. We were not able to obtain this level of detailed cost 

information for all contractors because EPA does not use this database for 

all the contractors who work at cleanup sites. To determine how EPA’s 

costs for the cleanup were funded, we reviewed relevant EPA financial 

documentation and appropriations legislation that reimbursed the 

Scope and 

Methodology 
Page 34 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

agency’s Superfund program for expenditures associated with the 

resources used on the cleanup. We did not validate or verify these data. 

To determine the extent to which the contracts used at the Capitol Hill 

anthrax site were competitively awarded, we reviewed EPA regional 

contract documents and discussed the competitive contract process EPA 

used with agency contract officials. We obtained and reviewed EPA 

noncompetitively awarded contract documents and the regulations that 

the agency is required to follow to justify awarding such contracts. We 

reviewed contracts and agency reports to identify the roles and tasks of 

the contractors that participated in the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup and 

discussed specific contract roles and tasks with EPA officials who were 

responsible for the cleanup. 

To describe the extent to which EPA oversaw contractors’ work on the 

Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup to ensure it was done appropriately and the 

charges were reasonable, we interviewed Region III contract officials and 

the site administrative officer who oversaw four contracts during the 

cleanup. We also examined documentation of the oversight provided by 

reviewing Capitol Hill site contracting files. We reviewed documentation 

of, and talked with agency officials about, the current contract oversight 

practices EPA uses, including staff responsibilities for cost oversight and 

the use of the contractor cost tracking system. In addition, in part because 

of delays in obtaining contract information, we surveyed the 63 EPA 

personnel whom the agency identified as having provided contractor 

oversight to obtain information on their roles in overseeing the 

contractors’ cleanup work for the Capitol Hill anthrax site. Using a Webbased survey, we received responses from 56 individuals, a response rate 

of 89 percent. We also interviewed nine EPA personnel who the survey 

identified as having spent considerable time at the cleanup site performing 

contract oversight. In addition, we reviewed four EPA assessments that 

either focused on or included the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup and that 

identified contract oversight issues and recommendations. We obtained 

information on actions EPA has taken or is taking to respond to the 

recommendations addressing contracting issues. 

To describe EPA’s indemnification of contractors against liability for 

potential damages, we reviewed CERCLA provisions and EPA guidance 

governing indemnity authority, as well as contract modifications regarding 

indemnification that EPA made to two contracts used for the Capitol Hill 

anthrax cleanup. We also discussed with EPA officials how the 

indemnification process affected the Capitol Hill anthrax cleanup. 
Page 35 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

We conducted our review from June 2002 through May 2003 in accordance 

with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce the contents of 

this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 14 days after the 

report date. At that time, we will send copies of this report to the 

Administrator of EPA and other interested parties. We will make copies 

available to others upon request. In addition, the report will be available at 

no charge on GAO’s Web site at http://www.gao.gov. 

If you or your staff have any questions, please call me at (202) 512-3841. 

Key contributors to this report are listed in appendix II. 

Sincerely yours, 

John B. Stephenson 

Director, Natural Resources 

 and Environment 
Appendix I: Contract Tasks and Roles 

Page 36 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

Contract Purpose Task/role performed 

Competitively awarded contracts

IT Corporation Removal Prepare buildings for decontamination. Conduct and support decontamination 

operations, including fumigation with chlorine dioxide gas. Decontaminate 

interior surfaces of buildings, other structures, cars, and other vessels. Provide 

for collection, containment, and transportation and disposal of contaminated 

materials from the site operations. 

Provide support to EPA sampling teams and other federal responders, including 

response technicians, to assist with decontamination activities. 

Tetra Tech EM, Inc. Technical Provide the on-scene coordinator and incident commander fumigation design 

procedures, including details on fumigant delivery; concentration; operating 

conditions, such as temperature and humidity; fumigant containment and 

recovery; and monitoring of parameters. Provide detailed design for delivery of 

fumigant, equipment requirements and specifications, flow schematics, and 

detailed schedules and operating procedures to use during fumigation. Provide 

a chlorine dioxide specialist to assist EPA in overseeing the fumigation setup. 

Provide technical support to the on-scene coordinator in developing chronology 

of events at the site, including researching various files, documents, and 

logbooks in order to develop a comprehensive report. 

Monitor and assist with the oversight of the chlorine dioxide fumigation process. 

Assist with health and safety matters at the site, conduct sampling, assist and 

oversee off-gassing, inventory, and return items being treated. 

Support the on-scene coordinator in conducting presentations and briefings 

related to post-treatment and design of chlorine dioxide use in the heating, 

ventilation, and air-conditioning system. 

Sample a small number of critical items (plastic, leather, and polyester) for 

ethylene oxide and its derivations to determine how the ethylene oxide and its 

derivatives are maintained in the materials and off-gas over time. 

Earth Tech, Inc. Removal Provide decontamination services and other direct support to sampling teams. 

Decontaminate interior surfaces of buildings, other structures, and interior and 

exterior surfaces of cars and other vessels identified by the on-scene 

coordinator. Collect all expended cleaning agents and materials for treatment 

and/or disposal. 

Provide decontamination facilities and services for response personnel and 

their equipment. Inventory items—segregating clean and contaminated 

materials and salvageable and expendable items—and provide documentation 

of inventoried items. 

Propose a decontamination strategy for critical items (including personal items 

such as photographs, framed diplomas, and equipment). Decontaminate critical 

and salvageable items from the Capitol Complex, including setting up work 

zones for items to be decontaminated and for personnel decontamination. 

Appendix I: Contract Tasks and Roles 
Appendix I: Contract Tasks and Roles 

Page 37 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

Contract Purpose Task/role performed 

Return property after decontamination. 

Provide contamination reduction and isolation facilities and operations that 

improve and ensure safe access to contaminated areas and items and 

prevent further spread of contamination. 

Environmental Quality 

Management, Inc. 

Removal Provide personnel and equipment, including portable decontamination 

facility. Collect expended cleaning agents and materials for treatment 

and/or disposal. Dispose of materials or items that could not be 

decontaminated. 

CDM Federal Programs 

Corporation 

Support Oversee preparation, handling, placement, and collection of spore strips used 

during fumigation with chlorine dioxide gas and ethylene oxide gas. Develop a 

procedure for spore strip emplacement; removal; and critical item tagging, 

tracking, and shipping. 

Provide sampling such as swipe and high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) 

vacuum (including efforts to collect, prepare, and ship samples), item 

decontamination, and minor remediation work. 

Support critical item degassing activities in Beltsville, Maryland. Maintain critical 

item inventories and coordinate the release and return of critical items to 

congressional staffers. 

Support chlorine dioxide decontamination of congressional mail packages. 

Roy F. Weston, Inc. Technical Develop various documents/plans to be used during the response activities 

(e.g., standard operating procedures for sampling, decontamination, source 

reduction). Provide reconnaissance, photo documentation, and sampling of 

congressional office buildings. 

Provide technical support for the selection and implementation of 

decontamination procedures; building-specific plan development for anthrax 

remediation, including sampling plans, isolation plans, decontamination plans, 

and item recovery plans; and sampling support for anthrax analysis using 

HEPA and wipe sampling techniques; perform oversight of removal crews. 

Provide swab and HEPA sampling and decontamination support. 

Provide bag-and-tag operations of critical and salvageable items in 

congressional office buildings. Provide air monitoring operations during 

chlorine dioxide fumigation operations. 

Ecology & Environment, 

Inc. 

Technical Develop sampling and decontamination plans, sample labels and chain-ofcustodies, and maps to support sampling activities and to track sampling 

results. 

Perform sampling, monitoring, and decontamination of areas in the Capitol Hill 

complex. Conduct sampling tracking and handling activities, including preparing 

samples for shipping. 

Compile and review background data and organize site documentation files. 
Appendix I: Contract Tasks and Roles 

Page 38 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

Contract Purpose Task/role performed 

Provide technical support to the operations section and support to the EPA 

Mobile Lab. 

Lockheed Martin Support Assist in monitoring temperature and relative humidity inside office buildings 

and in monitoring chlorine dioxide, chlorine, wind speed and direction, 

temperature and relative humidity in surrounding area. 

Assist with development and evaluation of anthrax fumigation procedures using 

spore strips in a test facility and train other contractors in the handling and 

placement of spore strips in the office building. 

Provide ambient air monitoring for chlorine dioxide using tape meters and a 

portable meteorological tower to document that no chlorine dioxide is being 

emitted from the treatment area. Provide on-site assistance to ensure that 

spore strip sampling is being conducted properly and that data management is 

being performed accurately and completely. 

Guardian Environmental 

Services, Inc. 

Removal Assist in the removal of items from the contaminated office suites in the 

congressional office buildings, including removal of contaminated office 

furniture, office equipment, and carpet. Construct isolation chambers, 

decontamination chambers, and other related structures. 

URS Operating Services, 

Inc. 

Technical Provide sampling for anthrax in the Capitol Hill complex. 

MVM Security & Staffing 

Services 

Security Provide security personnel to staff the single entrance/exit and to patrol 

perimeter of the storage location used for property removed from U.S. Senate 

offices during the cleanup to ensure that no unauthorized personnel enter the 

work area and assure that property items are not removed from the work area 

without approval of EPA. 

TSI, Inc. Supplies Provide Porta Count plus respirator fit tester. 

Noncompetitively awarded contracts

Kemron Environmental 

Services, Inc. 

Technical Perform air sampling and perform HEPA vacuuming services. 

Remove critical items and documents, spray affected areas with chlorine 

dioxide, and perform cleaning and breakdown of work zones. 

Assist EPA in the evaluation of possible remediation of the heating, 

ventilation, and air-conditioning system, including evaluation of affected 

areas, and construction of critical barriers inside the ductwork to isolate affected 

areas from uncontaminated areas. After fumigation of the affected heating, 

ventilation, and air conditioning system, provide confirmatory sampling support, 

interior duct sampling, additional cleaning of the system (including postfumigation scrub down inside the ducts), and removal of duct insulation. 

HMHTTC Response 

Team, Inc. 

Removal Perform cleanup activities, including construction and removal of isolation 

barriers, HEPA vacuuming operations, and application of liquid chlorine dioxide. 

Provide 24-hour support for decontamination and rescue operations at the 

Capitol Hill anthrax site. 
Appendix I: Contract Tasks and Roles 

Page 39 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

Contract Purpose Task/role performed 

Southwest Research 

Institute 

Laboratory work Provide analysis of spore strips placed in various locations during cleanup 

operations. Receive and perform daily observations of thousands of spore 

strips. 

University of California—

Berkeley Sponsored 

Projects Office 

Technical Participate in and support program plan development relating to spore 

sterilization technologies for remediation of federal facilities. 

Develop experimental and field test plans and methodologies for 

characterization/modeling spore killing processes and kinetics and factors that 

affect the efficacy of spore killing in field-scale applications. 

Establish laboratory systems for the measurement of gas phase sporicidal 

effects at federal office and mail facilities. Provide laboratory analytical support 

for measurement of gas phase sporicidal effects. Develop experimental and 

test plans and methodologies for assessing and validating spore killing 

processes. 

Determine the concentrations of chlorine dioxide needed to decontaminate 

anthrax on Capitol Hill. Prepare 31,500 test strips containing a bacillus similar 

to anthrax and send to Capitol Hill. The exposed strips will be sent to labs and 

results then will be sent to the University of California, Berkeley, to be included 

in a consolidated final report. 

Silva Consulting 

Services, 

LLC 

Technical Maintain sample management system software in a private, secure 

environment on the Internet. Provide EPA personnel and designated contractor 

personnel secure, controlled access to the database. This system could 

generate a large variety of reports to address particular questions about 

sampling results. 

Science Applications 

International Corporation 

Technical Provide consulting services to EPA on-scene coordinator in environmental 

remediation of anthrax-contaminated buildings in the Capitol Hill complex. 

Support includes data interpretation of the spore strips used to test the efficacy 

of the kill of anthrax, data validation, review of documents, assistance in 

document preparation, and report writing. Coordinate efforts with the University 

of California, Berkeley. 

Biomarine, Inc. Supplies Provide equipment that includes biopaks, facemasks, oxygen cylinders, gel 

tubes, foam scrubbers, coolant canister foam, flow restrictors, and biopak 

service and retrofit kits. 

Envirofoam 

Technologies, Inc. 

Supplies Provide Sandia foam and backpack dispensing units. 

Safeware, Inc. Supplies Provide respirators with battery and cartridge. 

Airgas Safety Supplies Provide air purifying respirators. 

Sabre Oxidation 

Technologies, Inc. 

Technical Provide engineering support during the assessment of the feasibility and 

design of the systems for fumigating air handling return system. 

U.S. Art Company, Inc. Technical Provide training on proper procedures for handling, packaging, and 

decontaminating artifacts (paintings, sculptures, and other art forms) from the 

Hart Senate Office Building. 
Appendix I: Contract Tasks and Roles 

Page 40 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

Contract Purpose Task/role performed 

Mine Safety Appliances Supplies Provide self-contained breathing apparatus system. 

Coastal Safety & Health 

Services, Inc. 

Supplies Provide indoor air quality meter. 

New Horizons 

Diagnostics Corporation 

Supplies Provide anthrax detection kits. 

Source: EPA. 
Appendix II: GAO Contacts and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

Page 41 GAO-03-686 Capitol Hill Anthrax Incident 

John B. Stephenson (202) 512-3841 

Christine Fishkin (202) 512-6895 

In addition to those named above, Heather Balent, Greg Carroll, Nancy 

Crothers, Richard Johnson, and Susan Lawes made key contributions to 

this report. 

Appendix II: GAO Contacts and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

GAO Contacts 

Acknowledgments 

(360214) 

The General Accounting Office, the audit, evaluation and investigative arm of 

Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities 

and to help improve the performance and accountability of the federal 

government for the American people. GAO examines the use of public funds; 

evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, 

recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make informed 

oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government 

is reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is 

through the Internet. GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts and fulltext files of current reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older 

products. The Web site features a search engine to help you locate documents 

using key words and phrases. You can print these documents in their entirety, 

including charts and other graphics. 

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as “Today’s Reports,” on its Web site 

daily. The list contains links to the full-text document files. To have GAO e-mail 

this list to you every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to daily 

E-mail alert for newly released products” under the GAO Reports heading. 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. A 

check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of Documents. 

GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a 

single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should be sent to: 

U.S. General Accounting Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm 

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Jeff Nelligan, Managing Director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 

U.S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

GAO’s Mission 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Public Affairs